natininja

Hotels probably figure it is better for business not to freak out Americans. Those toilets are very common.

Germans pee standing up at urinals. Sitting down at toilets. Wanna know why? The "examination table", aka "poo shelf", creates quite a splatter:

As with most Google Books, you can't read the whole thing. But you can read a good amount right here. (And you can search for references to Cincinnati.)

Awesome. Modify it again (make it slightly more Cbus-centric), and you could send it to the Dispatch, too.

Those are cool, though.

Keith M.: Sounds like a good LTE for the Enquirer.

I'd like to see more poverty concentrated in urban centers. That would really make Ohio cool.

In all honesty, I had hoped the casinos would be taxed more than the amendment set them to be. But, as usual, Kasich is going about this entirely the wrong way. I actually did not support the amendment, not because I'm against casinos, but because I felt there were too many specifics in there (monopolies, (low) tax values) that would better be set by a casino board or simple legislation (rather than a constitutional amendment). Now that the amendment has been passed, I accept the rules the way they were written. What's up with a Republican trying to gouge more taxes from corporations, anyway? Are you Kasich defenders going to come back with the "he's doing exactly what he was elected to do" meme on this one, too?

Medical marijuana = jobs. Legal marijuana = more jobs. Get with it, Kasich.

Another problem with IP bans is some ISPs assign dynamic IPs, meaning it changes each time someone connects with the ISP's server.

Thanks, that's the one I was looking for. ;)

^ Can you provide the missing link?

You can feel free to laugh now, Ken...the whole exchange was satire, from my side.

Good job, jdm00! ;) Now where is the crowd of men rushing in to rent units?

If I were Kroger, I would want the streetcar coming through University Plaza, right to the front door of my new store.

Alaska and Texas. But not Austin, and not where natives or Latinos make up a majority.

So, basically, the 4-3 vote was to obscure accountability for members' support or non-support of defunding the streetcar.

Don't be a champion for failure.

I mean suburbanites in NC may not hate the cities like they do in Ohio. From what I understand, the cities of NC, especially Charlotte, have a pretty suburban feel already. So suburbanites may feel more affinity for the cities in their state. Urban Indianapolis seems to have a favorable reception with suburbanites, for example. I think Ohio's city/suburb tensions may be extra high. I think the point about people from the northeast moving to NC is also relevant. Proximity to the NE Corridor probably doesn't hurt, either. Then you also have northeasterners traveling through the state on their way to Florida, which creates a rail presence.

Might it be because NC does not have the city/suburb animosity Ohio has? Business leaders tend to be suburbanites, so they are prone to side with suburban interests in Ohio.

Wow, that is freakin' awful.

It seems like Eighth and State is making the point that highways get the money to be built and (more or less) maintained. People either support that happening, or they don't object to it happening enough to stop it. He's saying rail needs to be in that position, if it is to be built and maintained. This is completely trivial, but that's all I can gather from what he's saying. Trying to figure out where he might be going with that, it seems he might be arguing that rail supporters should be looking for a systematic source of funds, rather than relying on these one-shot grants and whatnot that have brought the streetcar close to fruition. Meaning, an argument about where the energy should be focused of streetcar supporters. Instead of fighting these petty political battles, the energy should be toward convincing whoever needs convincing (e.g. voters/politicians supplying tax revenue, and/or businesses supplying funds and sponsorship) that these projects should be funded. I'm really going out on a limb trying to figure out what he's saying, because the way he's presenting it seems extremely convoluted.

How is that [amending the Ohio Constitution to prohibit Kasich from being governor] illegal, Sherman? Do you have a cite? No, I referred to the amendment that was designed to exclude funding for the Cincinnati streetcar, not to prohibit Kasich from being governor. Huh? I took it the same way as jdm00. Read the three posts starting here: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,24703.msg553791.html#msg553791

Political dissent, bro. Welcome to America. Speaking out against sitting politicians does not make you a "crybaby" or a "sore loser". I suppose you think exercising your 5th Amendment right would make you a wussy? No, believing that you can strongarm the will of the people - who voted him in on a MAJORITY plurality vote, by using bullsh!t recalls is doing nothing but resorting to the lowest form of trickery to achieve your personal ambitions and beliefs. I expect this sort of stuff from conservatives, because it's been mentioned before (e.g. think the 2000 Bush-Gore election mishap), but from liberals? My suggestion is tongue-in-cheek, but I don't think it's illegal. Also, it's not impeachment, nor a recall, but something much more absurd and fitting of the way Kasich looks at laws and governance.

Neither is it illegal to amend the constitution to block him from holding office.